Foreword |
|
xv | |
Preface |
|
xxvii | |
Acknowledgments |
|
xxx | |
Introduction |
|
xxxiii | |
|
Part 1 Keeping Your Eye on the Donut |
|
|
1 | (82) |
|
The Allure of the Project Schedule |
|
|
3 | (8) |
|
The Success of a Project Schedule Depends on Many Factors |
|
|
3 | (4) |
|
|
3 | (1) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
Schedule Developer Expertise |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
Tie-In to Other Project Controls |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
The Automated Project Schedule Offers These Strengths |
|
|
7 | (4) |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
It Facilitates Group Consensus |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
It Creates Powerful Perceptions |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
It Seamlessly Transitions from Plan to Schedule |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
It Supports Resource Optimization |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
It Provides Irrefutable Evidence |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
It Is a Dynamic Model of Reality |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
Understanding the Scheduling Theater |
|
|
11 | (22) |
|
The Stage: The Environment in Which Construction Takes Place |
|
|
11 | (10) |
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
A Project Is a Dynamic Organism |
|
|
13 | (2) |
|
Project Management as an Environmental Variable |
|
|
15 | (2) |
|
|
17 | (4) |
|
The Actors and Audience: Understanding Their Roles and Characters |
|
|
21 | (4) |
|
Those Who Do the Physical Work |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
Those Who Supervise the Physical Work |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
|
22 | (2) |
|
Those Who Support the Project Manager |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
Those Who Oversee the Project Manager |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
All Other Project Stakeholders |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
Those Who Supply the Project |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
The Script: The Project Schedule's Many Uses |
|
|
25 | (8) |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
|
26 | (2) |
|
As a Work Organization Tool |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
As a Resource Management Tool |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
As a Performance Measurement Tool |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
As a Contract Administration Tool |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
|
30 | (1) |
|
As a Financial Planning Tool |
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
As a Dispute Resolution Tool |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
Why Our Schedules Disappoint Our Customers |
|
|
33 | (22) |
|
Customer Dissatisfaction Reason #1: The Terminology Quagmire |
|
|
33 | (18) |
|
Distinguishing Between Internal and External Work Products |
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
Distinguishing Between Different External Work Products |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
This Is My Brother Darryl, and This Is My Other Brother Darryl |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
We Are Also Confusing Ourselves |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
Consistently Inconsistent Definitions |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
The Scheduling Method/Model Notion |
|
|
36 | (15) |
|
Customer Dissatisfaction Reason #2: Not Serving Our Customer |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
Customer Dissatisfaction Reason #3: Outdated Products and Services |
|
|
52 | (3) |
|
Is the Project Schedule Intelligently Designed? |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
Is the Project Schedule Thoughtfully Developed? |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
Is the Project Schedule Skillfully Used? |
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
Is the Project Schedule Attentively Maintained? |
|
|
53 | (2) |
|
The Changing Style of Project Management |
|
|
55 | (28) |
|
Project Management Paradigm Shift |
|
|
56 | (9) |
|
|
56 | (2) |
|
The New Sciences and What They Teach Management |
|
|
58 | (7) |
|
Characteristics of Project Management Paradigm Shift |
|
|
65 | (3) |
|
Implications for Modified Scheduling Methods |
|
|
68 | (15) |
|
Management Philosophy Beliefs |
|
|
69 | (5) |
|
Management Philosophy Behaviors |
|
|
74 | (4) |
|
Management Philosophy Merits |
|
|
78 | (5) |
|
Part 2 Creating a Penchant for Change |
|
|
83 | (90) |
|
The New Scheduling Practice Paradigm: Specializations, Positions, Deliverables, and Roles |
|
|
85 | (36) |
|
|
85 | (5) |
|
Explaining the Urgency of the Matter |
|
|
86 | (2) |
|
This Book is an Odd Place to Make Such a Proposal |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
Babbling Advisors Are Rarely Effective |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
The Scheduling Practice Lacks Cohesiveness and the Synergy Such Would Spawn |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
We Can't Fix What We Don't Acknowledge |
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
Scheduling is Not a Profession |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
Current Terminology Broken Beyond Repair |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (8) |
|
Historical Inconsistencies in the Use of the Word Planning |
|
|
93 | (2) |
|
Distinguishing between the Venerable and Current Definitions |
|
|
95 | (3) |
|
Can the Venerable and Current Models Be Reconciled? |
|
|
98 | (2) |
|
|
100 | (6) |
|
|
100 | (1) |
|
|
100 | (5) |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
Defining the Scheduling Practice |
|
|
106 | (15) |
|
Why ``Scheduling Practice''? |
|
|
107 | (1) |
|
The Three Specialties of the Scheduling Practice |
|
|
107 | (6) |
|
Definable Positions and Deliverables |
|
|
113 | (3) |
|
The Nine Roles of Scheduling Practitioners |
|
|
116 | (2) |
|
Why a Fresh Definition of the Scheduling Practice Makes Good Sense |
|
|
118 | (3) |
|
Introduction to Dilemma Control |
|
|
121 | (12) |
|
Risk Management and Its Distinguishing Characteristics |
|
|
121 | (6) |
|
Risk Management's Traditional Processes |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
Risk Management's Distinguishing Characteristics |
|
|
122 | (5) |
|
Dilemma Control, a New Project Management Methodology |
|
|
127 | (6) |
|
Comparison of Risk Management and Dilemma Control |
|
|
127 | (3) |
|
Brief Description of Dilemma Control |
|
|
130 | (1) |
|
Benefits of Dilemma Controls |
|
|
131 | (2) |
|
Introduction to Momentology |
|
|
133 | (26) |
|
Brief History of Momentology |
|
|
134 | (3) |
|
Notes on Scheduling Deficiencies |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
Conclusions About How to Improve Schedule Management |
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
Overview of Momentum Theory |
|
|
137 | (3) |
|
Duration-Day: The Numerator |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
Workdays: The Denominator |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
Performance Intensity: The Elusive Miles-Per-Hour |
|
|
138 | (2) |
|
Momentum: Purposeful Performance Intensity |
|
|
140 | (1) |
|
Overview of Momentum Science |
|
|
140 | (5) |
|
|
141 | (1) |
|
Other Improvements Under the Name of Momentum |
|
|
142 | (1) |
|
|
143 | (2) |
|
Momentum Science, a New Set of Performance Measures |
|
|
145 | (5) |
|
Momentum Science Big Picture |
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
Schedule Achievement Potential |
|
|
147 | (2) |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
Overview of Applied Momentum |
|
|
150 | (7) |
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
151 | (2) |
|
|
153 | (1) |
|
Administrative Activities |
|
|
153 | (1) |
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
Applied Momentum and Traditional Project Management |
|
|
154 | (3) |
|
Final Thoughts on Momentology |
|
|
157 | (2) |
|
Recap of New Concepts and Terminology |
|
|
159 | (4) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
The New Scheduling Practice Paradigm |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (2) |
|
|
161 | (1) |
|
|
161 | (1) |
|
|
161 | (2) |
|
Scheduling Practice and Faster Projects |
|
|
163 | (10) |
|
|
163 | (8) |
|
|
163 | (5) |
|
|
168 | (1) |
|
Execution Plans Involve a Two-Step Process |
|
|
168 | (1) |
|
The Execution Planning Heavily Influences the Execution Scheduling |
|
|
169 | (1) |
|
The Consensus Plan and Resource Planning |
|
|
170 | (1) |
|
|
171 | (1) |
|
|
171 | (2) |
|
Part 3 Preserving Project Schedule Integrity |
|
|
173 | (58) |
|
|
175 | (18) |
|
|
175 | (2) |
|
CPM Is a Mathematical Simulation Model |
|
|
175 | (1) |
|
|
175 | (1) |
|
|
176 | (1) |
|
|
176 | (1) |
|
Anatomy of a Relationship |
|
|
177 | (10) |
|
Negative Finish-to-Start Tie |
|
|
178 | (4) |
|
Time Gaps and Work Segments |
|
|
182 | (1) |
|
|
183 | (4) |
|
|
187 | (6) |
|
|
187 | (4) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
|
192 | (1) |
|
Working at Cross-Purposes |
|
|
193 | (38) |
|
Harmful Scheduling Practices |
|
|
194 | (2) |
|
Total-Float: The Only Statement of Criticality |
|
|
194 | (1) |
|
Relationship-Durations and Activity-Durations Equally Important |
|
|
195 | (1) |
|
|
196 | (1) |
|
|
196 | (1) |
|
Competing Project Controls |
|
|
196 | (1) |
|
The Benefits and Limitations of Earned Value Management System (EVMS) |
|
|
197 | (5) |
|
Advantages of Earned Value |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
Limitations of Earned Value |
|
|
198 | (3) |
|
How Earned Value Weakens a Schedule as a Momentum-Management Tool |
|
|
201 | (1) |
|
The Benefits and Limitations of Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) |
|
|
202 | (8) |
|
|
203 | (1) |
|
|
204 | (4) |
|
How CCPM Weakens a Schedule as a Time-Management Tool |
|
|
208 | (2) |
|
|
210 | (21) |
|
Two Important Trends in Scheduling Practice |
|
|
211 | (7) |
|
Critiquing Existing Definitions |
|
|
218 | (3) |
|
Arcane Term Meaning Clarifications |
|
|
221 | (10) |
|
Part 4 Execution Scheduling and Performance Control |
|
|
231 | (122) |
|
Concerning Schedule Design |
|
|
233 | (24) |
|
Purpose and Overall Process of Schedule Design |
|
|
233 | (2) |
|
Purpose of Schedule Design |
|
|
233 | (1) |
|
Process of Schedule Design |
|
|
234 | (1) |
|
|
235 | (10) |
|
|
236 | (1) |
|
|
236 | (1) |
|
|
236 | (9) |
|
|
245 | (12) |
|
Understanding Project Priorities and Emphasis |
|
|
245 | (4) |
|
Project Management Styles and Level-of-Detail |
|
|
249 | (5) |
|
|
254 | (1) |
|
Schedule Performance Specifications |
|
|
255 | (2) |
|
Concerning Schedule Development |
|
|
257 | (18) |
|
|
257 | (3) |
|
Logic Development Session |
|
|
260 | (15) |
|
|
260 | (2) |
|
|
262 | (1) |
|
|
263 | (1) |
|
|
263 | (1) |
|
Construction Approach Decisions |
|
|
264 | (1) |
|
|
264 | (1) |
|
Assigning Activity-Durations |
|
|
264 | (1) |
|
Adding Activity Relationships |
|
|
265 | (5) |
|
|
270 | (1) |
|
|
270 | (1) |
|
|
270 | (2) |
|
|
272 | (1) |
|
|
273 | (2) |
|
|
275 | (40) |
|
Elemental Components of the Execution Schedule |
|
|
275 | (7) |
|
|
275 | (2) |
|
|
277 | (1) |
|
|
277 | (1) |
|
|
278 | (1) |
|
|
279 | (1) |
|
|
279 | (1) |
|
|
280 | (1) |
|
|
281 | (1) |
|
Powerful Software Settings |
|
|
282 | (6) |
|
Retained-Logic vs. Progress-Override |
|
|
283 | (2) |
|
Continuous vs. Elapsed Durations |
|
|
285 | (1) |
|
Continuous vs. Interruptible Durations |
|
|
286 | (2) |
|
Automated Schedule Calendars |
|
|
288 | (5) |
|
|
288 | (2) |
|
|
290 | (2) |
|
Workdays vs. Calendar Days |
|
|
292 | (1) |
|
|
292 | (1) |
|
|
293 | (3) |
|
Which Activities Are Affected? |
|
|
293 | (1) |
|
Where Do You Place the Weather Contingency? |
|
|
294 | (1) |
|
Put Weather Contingency in the Calendar, Not in Durations |
|
|
295 | (1) |
|
Priority-Emphasis Alignment |
|
|
296 | (2) |
|
When Project Length (Time) is Emphatic |
|
|
296 | (1) |
|
When Manner of Performance Is Emphatic |
|
|
297 | (1) |
|
When Project Cost Is Emphatic |
|
|
297 | (1) |
|
|
298 | (2) |
|
|
298 | (1) |
|
|
298 | (1) |
|
|
299 | (1) |
|
|
299 | (1) |
|
Avoid Excessive Date-Constraint Use |
|
|
300 | (1) |
|
|
300 | (15) |
|
|
300 | (3) |
|
|
303 | (1) |
|
Defining Total-Float in PDM |
|
|
303 | (1) |
|
|
304 | (3) |
|
|
307 | (8) |
|
|
315 | (10) |
|
Performance Recording Issues |
|
|
315 | (6) |
|
|
315 | (2) |
|
|
317 | (2) |
|
Remaining-Duration vs. Percent-Complete |
|
|
319 | (1) |
|
Performance Recording and Relationship-Durations--- |
|
|
320 | (1) |
|
|
320 | (1) |
|
|
321 | (1) |
|
|
321 | (1) |
|
What Precipitates a Revision? |
|
|
321 | (1) |
|
|
322 | (1) |
|
Keep the Owner in the Loop |
|
|
322 | (1) |
|
Schedule Performance Analysis |
|
|
322 | (3) |
|
|
325 | (28) |
|
Performance Control, the Ultimate Objective |
|
|
325 | (1) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Understand |
|
|
326 | (13) |
|
Using the Schedule to Measure Progress |
|
|
327 | (3) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Analyze Reality |
|
|
330 | (8) |
|
Using the Schedule to Optimize the Future |
|
|
338 | (1) |
|
Using the Schedule to Communicate |
|
|
339 | (7) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Inform |
|
|
339 | (4) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Coordinate |
|
|
343 | (2) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Direct |
|
|
345 | (1) |
|
Using the Project Schedule to Control |
|
|
345 | (1) |
|
|
346 | (7) |
|
|
347 | (1) |
|
Identifying the Sources of Divergence |
|
|
347 | (1) |
|
Where Improvement Opportunities Reside |
|
|
347 | (6) |
|
|
353 | (18) |
|
Creating Schedules They'll Actually Want to Use! |
|
|
357 | (14) |
|
Top Ten Techniques for Sabotaging Your Scheduling Efforts |
|
|
357 | (3) |
|
Technique #10: Disconnect the Project Schedule from All Other Project Management Support Functions |
|
|
357 | (1) |
|
Technique #9: Don't Safeguard Duration Purity |
|
|
358 | (1) |
|
Technique #8: Employ Poor Reporting Techniques |
|
|
358 | (1) |
|
Technique #7: Fail to Adhere to Sound Performance Recording Practices |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #6: Mismanage Relationships |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #5: Choose Inappropriate Scheduling Software Settings |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #4: Ignore the Theory of Aligned Emphasis |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #3: Ignore Project Momentum |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #2: Force the Schedule to Satisfy Too Many Different Uses/Objectives |
|
|
359 | (1) |
|
Technique #1: Entirely Omit, or Inadequately Perform, Schedule Design |
|
|
360 | (1) |
|
Chapter-by-Chapter Summary of the Book's Essential Comments |
|
|
360 | (11) |
|
Part 1: Keeping Your Eye on the Donut |
|
|
360 | (3) |
|
Part 2: Creating a Penchant for Change |
|
|
363 | (3) |
|
Part 3: Preserving Project Schedule Integrity |
|
|
366 | (2) |
|
Part 4: Execution Scheduling and Performance Control |
|
|
368 | (3) |
Glossary |
|
371 | (30) |
Index |
|
401 | |